Poll: No-kids-allowed movement. Yay or nay?

[Stephanos132]

There's a fundamental difference between spending time with your family and being a ****. Also, I'm pretty sure that comes under breaking the law, whereas taking your kids out and about is perfectly legal.

Which is the point of this thread. It shouldn't be, because if you're the kind of person who feels the need to take a screaming infant to a restaurant, your kid's gonna be a horrid little bastard and disturb others.

What you and the silly person are saying is that the obnoxiousness of a few is a right that should be protected, while the peace and quiet of many is not.

That's perverse.

No less perverse than the intolerant few who demand that nothing disturb their perfectly quiet world, and that their rights take precedence over others as well. Would you so willingly turn away, say, the second coming of Christ just because he was a child? Let the businesses decide. If they choose to serve kids too, then so be it. The rest of us will have to lump it (and really, is a loud child so terrible a thing that the steak you ordered is irrevocably ruined?)

Not a presumptuous little man are you?

It's either that, or a troll. Plus, I don't take kindly to being patronised by people who, after the third time that I tell them that children do not enjoy full civil rights, keeps blathering on about how everybody has the same rights.

They have a right to exist and be about in this world. That's enough for most of us, why not you?

 

[targren]

Also I'm fairly certain only complete morons have kids for financial reasons. Parenthood doesn't work like that.

Judging by the whining going on by people who are more important than everyone else in the place, and the pattern of behavior that caused it, it's almost conceivable that only complete morons have kids, period.

 

[Pinstar]

Why do we need sweeping rules? Let places of business decide their own rules and let them reap the positive/negative consequences of choosing that rule.

 

[targren]

Why do we need sweeping rules? Let places of business decide their own rules and let them reap the positive/negative consequences of choosing that rule.

That *is* what's going on. Individual businesses are moving, more and more, to banning or limiting children, and people are getting their panties in a bunch about it.

 

[xmbts]

Or how about people quit whining and just enjoy their damn meal?

How about the parents quit whining and hire a sitter? That seems far easier then getting strangers to put up with kids throwing a tantrum.

I'm not sure how I feel about this but that's got to be the worst argument I've heard so far.

Sitters are expensive, maybe they want to have a nice family night out?

You ask why you have to put up with them because they feel like going out, I ask why they have to put up with you making thing even more complicated for them.

Also I'm fairly certain only complete morons have kids for financial reasons. Parenthood doesn't work like that.

Judging by the whining going on by people who are more important than everyone else in the place, and the pattern of behavior that caused it, it's almost conceivable that only complete morons have kids, period.

You are aware you just insulted every person in existence, correct?

You don't have to understand someone's thought process to not be tolerant.

 

[galeofceres]

@targren
I cite my earlier post for this problem. Since they're doing away with the smoking sections, why not replace them with child-friendly sections?

 

[chocolate pickles]

I can see the movement's point, but i dont agree with it. As a kid, i didnt ruin a movie for everyone else by talking through it or anything like that: I was quiet and watched the film. I think it seem's unfair to not give the kid's a chance to prove they can behave.

 

[JCBFGD]

-snip-

With the system you propose (sneakily banning all kids), instead of having just the annoying parents bitching at you for keeping them out, you'll be facing lawsuits (or at least more bitching) from the parents of the well-behaved kids. Why piss off all parents when you can only piss off those who deserve it? You imply that all parents brought "this" ("this" being banned from evarywhar) on themselves by "spawning"...that's kinda messed up. First off, implying that they're inhuman creatures that spawn is just ignorant, but second of all, only the bad parents/kids deserve this. So just chill; having kids isn't the end of the world and it's not one of the Seven Deadly Sins.

Oh, also, I'm only 16, I don't have any kids, much to my chagrin.

 

[Stephanos132]

They have a right to exist and be about in this world. That's enough for most of us, why not you?

It's hilarious that you presume to speak for the majority when your viewpoint is losing in a bloody landslide.

It's hilarious that you think this is a majority opinion based on a vote involving one overriding 'group' of people (gamers), on which not all of them have put an opinion. Silence does not translate to a yes.

Plus, I don't know if you've ventured out lately, but I have, I've eaten in nice restaurants, and yes there were kids and yet no-one was tearing their hair out in frustration. Maybe it's just you and a very vocal minority today, as it typically is with blanket bans.

 

[xmbts]

Adults do have more rights than children. If you don't believe me try bringing a child to a strip club or asking the child to buy you alcohol. Yes that does make us unequal.

Kind of irrelevant seeing as this isn't about booze or sex, it's about people throwing a tantrum because kids throw tantrums and frankly it's embarrassing that they call themselves more mature.

You said kids have the same rights as adults.

Any lawyer in the country will tell you that that's not true.

Booze and porn are some of the rights adults have that minors do not.

...Kay?

I wouldn't call those rights so much as allowances, I'm talking about rights, such as the right to speak freely, or to go somewhere without people discouraging you for silly reasons.

 

[6_Qubed]

On one hand, I adore my nieces and nephew, even the younger ones, and hate to see them kept out of a place because of someone else's lax parenting.

On the other hand, I can't stand it when someone brings their screaming grabby brat into a place where I'm trying to relax and do some thinking in peace and quiet and maybe grab a few refills on my Diet Coke while I'm at it. This is but one of the myriad reasons why my headphones and MP3 player might as well be surgically attached.

As long as the volume isn't so loud that it, you know, disturbs people who try to relax and have some peace and quiet.

'Course not.

They can't hear me over their screaming kids.

 

[targren]

Sitters are expensive, maybe they want to have a nice family night out?

Economical concerns are part of being a parent. They decided to have a kid, that's their problem. And if they want to have a "nice family night out," then they can go to one of the many businesses who will doubtlessly continue to welcome children. The kids would probably have a better time at Chuck-E-Cheeze than at a steakhouse anyway.

You ask why you have to put up with them because they feel like going out, I ask why they have to put up with you making thing even more complicated for them.

Read my posts. They did it to themselves. Crappy parenting leading to misbehaving kids annoying people in planes, movies, and restaurants have been a staple of stand-up comedy for 50+ years. Now some businesses are finally deciding that they don't have to put up with having their customers run off by these people.

Also I'm fairly certain only complete morons have kids for financial reasons. Parenthood doesn't work like that.

Judging by the whining going on by people who are more important than everyone else in the place, and the pattern of behavior that caused it, it's almost conceivable that only complete morons have kids, period.

You are aware you just insulted every person in existence, correct?

Correction: I just insulted the parents of every person in existence. Anyone who is a leaf (mathematically speaking) on their family tree isn't in the set.

You don't have to understand someone's thought process to not be tolerant.

I'm not sure if this is meant to be some kind of passive-aggressive insult, or just a non-sequitur that was stuck in the buffer or something, but "intolerance" is not automatically a bad thing.

If a judge doesn't tolerate corruption among his staff, that's intolerance.
If a (good) parent doesn't tolerate her child beating up on the smaller kids, that's intolerance.

And it's the same with business owners who are learning that they don't have to tolerate rude, insensitive people ruining their relationships with their other customers. No one is entitled to special treatment just because they decided to reproduce. These are private businesses, not the government.

 

[Qitz]

I don't see any problem with this. It's the same with Smoking in the restaurant / bar. If management wants it like that, you can either deal with it or move on.

 

[targren]

-snip-

With the system you propose (sneakily banning all kids), instead of having just the annoying parents bitching at you for keeping them out, you'll be facing lawsuits (or at least more bitching) from the parents of the well-behaved kids. Why piss off all parents when you can only piss off those who deserve it? You imply that all parents brought "this" ("this" being banned from evarywhar) on themselves by "spawning"...that's kinda messed up. First off, implying that they're inhuman creatures that spawn is just ignorant, but second of all, only the bad parents/kids deserve this. So just chill; having kids isn't the end of the world and it's not one of the Seven Deadly Sins.

Nice trick, snipping my post so that you could set up a strawman and argue against something I never said. No where did I advocate "sneaky," nor from "everywhere." If you could read, you'd see that I said that it must be the business owners' decision. Let the owner of each restaurant, store, or movie theatre decide whether they want to be "family friendly" or "Kid free" zone. They could even work it into their advertising. It's good for them, since all the people who would go to the kids-banned place will go there instead. If the kid-free zones start feeling their client base pinch, they reverse the policy. Simple.


I was going to respond to this little screed:
[/quote[ You imply that all parents brought "this" ("this" being banned from evarywhar) on themselves by "spawning"...that's kinda messed up. First off, implying that they're inhuman creatures that spawn is just ignorant, but second of all, only the bad parents/kids deserve this. So just chill; having kids isn't the end of the world and it's not one of the Seven Deadly Sins.[/quote]

Until I read this bit:

Oh, also, I'm only 16, I don't have any kids, much to my chagrin.

Umm. Yeah.

You can may go away content in the knowledge that you've been dismissed by an ageist and that your points were all perfectly valid, not a mass of subjective incoherence aimed at a soggy strawman.

 

[xmbts]

Sitters are expensive, maybe they want to have a nice family night out?

Economical concerns are part of being a parent. They decided to have a kid, that's their problem. And if they want to have a "nice family night out," then they can go to one of the many businesses who will doubtlessly continue to welcome children. The kids would probably have a better time at Chuck-E-Cheeze than at a steakhouse anyway.

You ask why you have to put up with them because they feel like going out, I ask why they have to put up with you making thing even more complicated for them.

Read my posts. They did it to themselves. Crappy parenting leading to misbehaving kids annoying people in planes, movies, and restaurants have been a staple of stand-up comedy for 50+ years. Now some businesses are finally deciding that they don't have to put up with having their customers run off by these people.

Also I'm fairly certain only complete morons have kids for financial reasons. Parenthood doesn't work like that.

Judging by the whining going on by people who are more important than everyone else in the place, and the pattern of behavior that caused it, it's almost conceivable that only complete morons have kids, period.

You are aware you just insulted every person in existence, correct?

Correction: I just insulted the parents of every person in existence. Anyone who is a leaf (mathematically speaking) on their family tree isn't in the set.

You don't have to understand someone's thought process to not be tolerant.

I'm not sure if this is meant to be some kind of passive-aggressive insult, or just a non-sequitur that was stuck in the buffer or something, but "intolerance" is not automatically a bad thing.

If a judge doesn't tolerate corruption among his staff, that's intolerance.
If a (good) parent doesn't tolerate her child beating up on the smaller kids, that's intolerance.

And it's the same with business owners who are learning that they don't have to tolerate rude, insensitive people ruining their relationships with their other customers. No one is entitled to special treatment just because they decided to reproduce. These are private businesses, not the government.

If you're going to force them to employ sitters that isn't exactly their fault now is it?

Why should the billions of good parents suffer hardship because some people just can't handle a crying kid?

You can say it's about punishing bad parents all you want but it's mostly motivated by people who would rather impose a ridiculous ban then bring themselves to cope with someone inadvertently annoying them. For all the complaints against kids does anybody here really lose sleep over such a trivial encounter?